About your Search

20130416
20130424
STATION
CNNW 3
MSNBCW 2
CSPAN 1
LANGUAGE
English 21
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)
to the miranda rule. they've not advised him of his rights. so they can only ask about potential threats to public safety. were there other conspirators, other bombs out there, any reason to believe that public safety is in any way jeopardized. >> pete, one of the persons cited in terms of this idea that there may have been more violent plans on order at the hands of the brothers is this person who was hijacked by the brothers on thursday night. and the driver of a mercedes suv. we know that he's been cooperating with police. is there anything else that we know about his involvement in all of this? >> yeah, the business about new york is very iffy, frankly. i've emailed briefly with this person. he claims that he escaped with they stopped at a gasoline station. but he's also told the police that he was told by these two men, that they were the marathon bombers. but that they were not going to kill him because he was not an american. what he told the police was, that he thought they were speaking arabic. that's probably not the case, they were probably speaking russian or some dialect. an
't -- he shouldn't be mirandaized right away. i know you agree with them. >> i think the miranda issue is an easier issue. he doesn't have to be mar lindaized for a lot of reason. first of all, they have enough evidence to convict him without getting a confession from him. all miranda gets you is a confession you can use in court. you can use that information for everything else. remember, he confessed already to the guy they kidnapped. the guy he kidnapped says, these two guys told us, we did the bombing. they got great witness and they got a great confession. maybe even better than a law enforcement confession where you can claim it was forced out of you. they gave a upon takenious confession -- spontaneous confession. >> bob wants to get in here. so then why did they need to make that statement? i'm trying to figure out why they made that statement? >> i don't know exactly why they made it. maybe because they got so much criticism -- remember the christmas morning bomber that they mirandaized right away, lost the opportunity to get information from him? so i think maybe they were pl
authorities say he does not need to be read his miranda rights. >> right. first of all, let's just remember he may be in no physical condition to answer questions with or without miranda warnings. so his physical condition is the great unknown here which may render this whole dispute about miranda moot. let's assume that he is in a condition to answer questions. usually when someone is arrested, they get miranda warnings, and then they is a choice of whether to answer questions or not. here the government has said when there is an imminent danger to public safety, they can question without miranda warnings. that has traditionally or usually been interpreted to mean a future danger to public safety. the so-called ticking time bomb. tell us what's going to happen in the future, and we're not going to worry about miranda. what makes this an unusual invocation of the public safety exception is that the government is saying there is no more danger. there is no further conspirator out there. the government's position may be somewhat internally contradictory. that's something to keep an eye on as thi
understand if he is indeed conscious and does survive before reading him miranda rights; is that correct? >> i believe molly line will be talking about that a little bit as well. there is a loophole. there is a way they don't have to. so he was not read his miranda rights to allow to ask questions of him. we don't know if questions have been asked. they may have asked questions of him when he was under the situation he was in, of course being pretty seriously injured. they do believe he is going to make it. that was something, not only important for them to do that because that is what we do in this society but important because of this investigation. last night we were told he was being brought here for treatment. we weren't too far behind the ambulance. as you made your way through boston, you could see many of the businesses reopened. you saw restaurants and bars reopened. at one point there was a small college and 500 students had gone into the streets and blocked off all four lanes cheering, holding signs and as first responders and medical teams came through that had nothing to do
him before he receives miranda warning is the right thing to do. a short time ago, the aclu put out a statement saying every defendant is entitled to defend miranda lights. five lawmakers want him treated as an enemy combatant. 53 people remain in boston hospitals today, three in critical condition, including a 7-year-old girl. nbc news national investigative correspondent michaels i cough is in boston, ron allen outside boston's beth israel medical center where the suspect and many of the victims are being kept and kristen we willinger at the white house, let's get to the latest on investigation. for that, we turn to michaels i cough, again, in boston. what is the fbi focusing on today and moving forward? >> reporter: federal prosecutors are focusing on drafting a criminal complaint we could see as early as this afternoon, detailing the criminal charges against him supported by an affidavit from an fbi agent that would lay out some details of the plot. not all of them but could provide crucial new information for us about what tsarnaev actually did and raise and shed some light on
condition. a lot of talk about miranda. michael you prosecuted richard reid the shoe bomber in federal court. how unusual is it to not read miranda warnings? >> case specific. if there is an imminent public safe itty concern they should exercise the miranda exception under public safety and try to get as much information as they possibly can in order to protect the public. i think it is perfectly legitimate under these circumstances. >> judge jeanine: jay, to you when we talk about the public safety exception here. how long is that exception good for are? how long can they go without reading him his rights? >> there is no definitive statement but most people believe it is 48 hours. you a situation here where the distort accused is not conscious are in to even speak so 48 hours. points to a fundamental problem with thinking about mir randiesing. do we want a prosecution or an investigation to determine how deep the terrorist links might be and whether there were additional plans for terror activity. an awful load of weapons that the two possessed. the situation with the travel to russia. all
given all that's transpired over the last week. >> he was not read his miranda rights which a lot of people are talking about today. explain the reason why. >> well, in the law there's what they have called a public safety exception to miranda. everybody knows what miranda is. you have the right to remain silent. anything you say can and will be used against you. the police don't have to say that to you if they are in hot pursuit of something relating to public safety. maybe worried about bombs in this case. they're worried about another plot or something else happening. so under those circumstances authorities do not have to give the miranda warning immediately to a suspect. a lot of people out there saying on the right that they ought not give miranda rights or any other kinds of rights to people who are deemed terrorists. people on the left saying you ought to use the regular court to try to try these individuals. this is an ongoing debate about the law in this country. >> let's talk about the penalty that the younger suspect may face. we're still waiting for charges to be file
can he be questioned before the public safety runs out, most say 48 hours. once under miranda he is under no obligation to cooperate with authorities. >> remember the number one goal right here is to get inside his head and get whatever intelligence he has with any operatives in the united states to protect the homeland and protect americans inside the united states. >> reporter: speaking this morning on fox news, former u.s. attorney general alberto gonzales suggested being mirandized will not necessarily close off the flow of information from tsnaraev. >> we have something we can give him which is his life. for example, taking the death penalty off the i believe at that. there is possible some kind of deal would be made where he provides information and in exchange for that the government gives him some kind of a plea agreement. >> reporter: gonzalez suspects what may be happening now is in the obama administration is a quote, interagency scrum where some are pushing for a quick mirandizing. others may be advocating a delay so as much information as possible can be garnered, ma
miranda rights and there is it a safety exception that allows you 48 hour to see if there is any bombs that may be connected with the attack. under the law of war, an enemy combatant and someone who takes up arms against this country, including an american citizen can be held for intelligence purposes without a lawyer and miranda warningings. the best way to get information from the suspect is hold him as an enemy combatant. it a terrorist attack and not a common crime. in 30 days he would be presented before a federal judge and the judge could review the case that the government has. i am urging this administration, please do not lawyer him up tomorrow night. you have under our statutes and supreme court cases,le authority to hold him as an enemy combatant ting gather intelligence about what is coming our way in the future. >> there is great relief in boston today but a lot of people are concern body what might be to come whether it is it inspired by the actions or a connection, we really don't know the answer to that question yet, do we senator? >> it is impossible between now and to
negotiation with the fbi he gives himself up. >> right. >> they arrest him. they don't read him his miranda rights. explain. >> i'm not great on this. my understanding with the fbi and the federal authorities is that it's a terrorist act that they don't get certain rights that the rest of us would be afforded. they wanted to make sure that if we did speak with him that he wouldn't be given his miranda rights and something else kicked in. he was just -- >> you were told this in advance. if you found the guy, your officers are not going to read him his miranda rights. >> this never played out. there was no interviewing at the scene. he needed aid. >> he was in no position to talk. >> exactly. >> he was a very weak -- did he mumble anything? did he say anything? did he give any political statements? >> my understanding is he didn't have anything to say. i don't know for sure. >> what about during the 20-minute negotiation with the fbi when they were working out his surrender? did he make any statements that could be useful? >> no. i'm not aware of any statements. i think it was more he was fin
be read his miranda rights. moving past the politics of it because it seems to get a little poe lit kal, as a former member of fbi how does whether or not the suspect is read his miranda rights influence or impact your investigation? >> it really becomes irrelevant. good report-based interviewers and interrogators who are the ones most effective. the fbi doesn't do that because we're nice. we do that because it worked. in reported based interviewers miranda they can read that and continue. it is not a major obstacle. it is almost irrelevant. jenna: really? we're hearing a it is a major issue whether we get to the bottom of this investigation. so what should we consider as we continue to hear the debate ongoing over the next several days? >> it doesn't, it really doesn't make that much difference to the interviewers and especially the particular group of profile he is -- profilers they developed at quantico, at the fbi academy. this is not terribly relevant. they can sit down with the people. they can interview them. they look for behavioral cues. they look for a way to establish a relat
tsarnaev the 19-year-old surviving suspect be interrogated. should he get his miranda warnings against self-incrimination. tried in a is civilian court or military tribunal. before we go there let's start with the latest from the scene and why craig and a i immediately recognized the pressure cooker bombs. we have seen them many times before. here is craig's crime time report. >> reporter: the quiet streets of watertown became a war zone as the boston marathon bombers made their last stand here. homes can be seen riddled with bullets. this black mark from a pressure cooker bomb, one just like the one that was used to kill three people, wounding 180. >> there was two cars. black suv and a green looked like honda accord. had some bags that he was one of the guys was lighting things and throwing them. had fuses and they would explode but you also lots of shoot going on. >> brothers dhokhar 19 and 26-year-old tamerlan starr tsarnaev add to the marathon death toll, killing police officer shawn collier in cold blood. >> the police officer that was killed you said it was a massacre. >> assassinati
shouldn't be mirandaized right away. i know you agree with them. >> i think the miranda issue is an easier issue. he doesn't have to be mar lindaized for a lot of reason. first of all, they have enough evidence to convict him without getting a confession from him. all miranda gets you is a confession you can use in court. you can use that information for everything else. remember, he confessed already to the guy they kidnapped. the guy he kidnapped says, these two guys told us, we did the bombing. they got great witness and they got a great confession. maybe even better than a law enforcement confession where you can claim it was forced out of you. they gave a upon takenious confession -- spontaneous confession. >> bob wants to get in here. so then why did they need to make that statement? i'm trying to figure out why they made that statement? >> i don't know exactly why they made it. maybe because they got so much criticism -- remember the christmas morning bomber that they mirandaized right away, lost the opportunity to get information from him? so i think maybe they were playing defense
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
washington, the decision to read the boston bombing suspect his miranda rights. last hour, lindsay graham and kel i iote said is there is no way a defense lawyer is going to let dzhokar tsarnaev talk any more without taking the death penalty off the table. he has been in custody for 60 hours which the feds decided to read him his miranda rates. joining us is mercedes cowlin and you had such different reactions to this. right is ticked off that his miranda rights were yesterday red to him. he can't speak we're told like a one word, yes or one word no, the left is ticked off it took him as long as it did to read the miranda rights. >> first of all, i to give kudos for calling it an act of terrorism to the obama administration like they called hassan workplace violence. bottom line, if they don't want to use the statements a this guy makes in a criminal prosecution, they can ask him questions all day long without murnd. they can do it after he gets a lawyer as long as a clean team, a team that is is not involved in the criminal prosecution goes in and asks intelligence related questions that
, should dzhokhar tsarnaev be treated as a criminal, or treated under the miranda rule and read his rights and given a lawyer or treated as enmyth combatant with no such protections? >> i believe strongly the former. that is the only legal way to proceed. i do not believe under the military commission law that she is eligible for that. it would be unconstitutional to do that. one of the great things in america we come together at times of trial. i very much regret the fact that there are those that want to precipitate debate whether he's enemy combatant or whether he is a terrorist, murder, et cetera. federal law, we have had 435 terrorist convictions. under federal law. we had 100-plus arrests. maybe half a dozen under the military commission. this is clear to me that the course that can be taken, the high value interrogation group. they are skilled and they know how to do this. the miranda right can be read at a later time. he has reportedly been shot through the throat, he is incubated and he can't talk now. there is time to do the investigation, to make a clear assessment and move from
with the questions out receiving miranda warnings but the only downside is that his statements may not be used against him at trial. this is not much of a risk when you consider the other available evidence including photo images of him at the scene of the bombings and his own reported confession to the victim whose car he helped hijack during the last week's terror in boston. . but if your concern is over the larger threat in who the tsarnaev brothers were and are, what they did and what they represent, then worry a lot. for starters, you you can worry about how the high-value intergage group or h.i.g., will do its work. that unit was finally put in place by the f.b.i. after so-called underwear bomber tried to blow up the airplane in which he was traveling as it flew over detroit on christmas day, 2009. and was advise of his mir and da rights. the c.i.a. interrogation program that might have handleled the interview had by then been dismantled by president obama. at the behest of such muslim brotherhood affiliated groups as the council on american islamic relations, and the islamic society of
. they didn't give a miranda warning so the aclu is shouting about that. and of course, well-known southern bell lindsey graham, why isn't he being treated as an enemy combatant? that one to me -- >> what about benghazi? >> shut up. >> stephanie: i'll always have benghazi. it is my terror. no. >> i would never go thirsty again. i'll have another mint julep thank you. >> stephanie: the legal expert i heard this weekend said this is a nonstarter to treat him as enemy combatants. did he a crime on u.s. soil. >> peter king said this. >> i believe -- should be portrayed as enemy combatants. senator mccain, senator graham, senator ayotte, there are so many questions unanswered so many potential links to terrorism here. the battlefield is now in the united states. i believe he is an enemy combatant. ultimately, he will be tried in a civilian court and the statements taken from him cannot be used against him in that trial. right now, the only links we have as much as chechnyan involvement in the islamic movement. are there other conspirators out there? where do they get the radicalization? >> he so
Search Results 0 to 20 of about 21 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)